Author: Redactor

There’s a shakeup happening in the Michigan Senate.

House members had already felt the impact of term limits in 1998, when 64 members became ineligible to serve again. Now it is the Senate’s turn. In the coming session, 27 new members are taking seats in the 38-​member state Senate; the House will see 50 new members.

But the Detroit News says it isn’t even happening. “The Senate is getting a transfusion of old blood from the House,” says the News . “Of the 27 freshmen to be sworn in for the 38-​member Senate, 26 are current or former members of the state House just a quick stroll across the Capitol.”

Lobbyist Bill Rustem confirms that “If the goal of term limits was fresh faces, it didn’t work.”

Hey, be careful what you wish for, guys. After all, most voters would probably not object if term limits were even tougher. In any case, the claim is bogus. Thanks to the limits that went into effect in 1998, many of the House members who have now found a place in the Senate have been in the legislature for just six years, or even less.

These comparatively short legislative resumes hardly turn the Capitol into a “giant recycling bin.” And transplants from the House will have to leave at the end of two senatorial terms. So the fresh faces will keep on coming.

No matter how you slice it, term limits invigorate electoral competition and prevent encrusted old-​boy networks from sending down permanent roots in either chamber.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Hey, do you like trains, do you like to watch trains, do you like to find out everything you can about trains? Are you a railroad buff, a so-​called “railfan”?

Well, then you are under arrest. Well, not quite under arrest. Although some have been threatened with arrest. But you may be approached and interrogated and told don’t do it again. Even a police officer who trainspots as a hobby was given the shake-​down by other police officers. They took Richard Whitenight’s notebook and grilled him about every scribble. They searched his car and took photos of it. And then he had to sign a written agreement never to return to that particular location.

Other railfans have reported similar treatment. All this started happening because of the usual vague terrorist warnings, this time about railroads. But don’t we get new alerts every few weeks about something or other being targeted? Maybe? Possibly?

A while back the word went out about apartment complexes. I don’t know about you, but when I’m thinking about moving into a place, I go there, look around, take a few notes. I could understand somebody coming up to me and saying, Hey, I don’t think I know you, can I help you? But threatening me with interrogation and arrest is something else again.

Railfans are well-​known to the railroads. What we want to be on the lookout for is suspicious behavior. If we must be on the lookout, let’s look for suspicious activity that is suspicious activity. Not the kinds of things people always do … when they are free.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

We’re a wealthy nation and that’s a good thing. But often when we hear someone referred to as “wealthy” as in “wealthy contributor” the speaker is implies that that’s a bad thing. As if to be wealthy is more likely a consequence of corruption than of hard work and character. Not fair.

When I contribute to a political campaign, I feel good about it. Because I believe in what I’m doing. If I had built a super-​profitable business, the check I write would be a heck of a lot bigger, but my motive would be the same.

Attacking people for their wealth is unfair. It also ignores a crucial factor in American history, a factor which allowed there to be an American history. We all know John Hancock as the gentleman who signed his name to The Declaration of Independence with such a flourish that King George wouldn’t possibly need his spectacles to read it.

But John Hancock’s penmanship was not what scared the Brits.

What scared them was his money. Hancock was a very wealthy man and he used his wealth to fund the American Revolution. Hancock’s generosity was such a critical resource that when the Massachusetts governor returned to England right before the war to meet with King George, one of the King’s first questions was, “What is the state of Hancock’s finances?”

The King of England heading the wealthiest, most powerful country in the world knew that no political effort could survive without money. No doubt King George would have been a big proponent of placing limits on campaign financing.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

What if you went for a checkup with the doctor and just paid for it? You know, like you pay for bread and milk and such? Government regulations and health insurance oversight have infected the business of medicine. We don’t use insurance to buy bread and milk.

But when it comes to medicine, seems almost every bill we pay is the responsibility of our insurance company. The result has been skyrocketing demand for services by patients who don’t directly feel the pain of paying for individual costs. Skyrocketing regulations by third parties eager to control costs. And lots of harried doctors, virtually working second jobs as paper-pushers.

Doctors are getting fed up. Some are quitting altogether. But others are just quitting the system. Trying what Dan Rather calls a “new approach” to medicine: “boutique” medicine. These radical doctors no longer accept insurance as a method of payment. They’ll treat only those patients who pay them directly. And guess what? Turns out they can offer a reasonable service at a reasonable price.

One doctor told “CBS News” that he charges $40 for a basic checkup, and is doing very well, thank you. No more answering to a faceless third party and filling out forms all the time. He’s slashed his monthly expenses and doesn’t have to treat the patients like cattle to meet some kind of assembly-​line quota.

In other words: a free market! Buyer and seller, agreeing to a mutually beneficial trade … all by themselves. What a wild notion. But I like it.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Would you say it’s a big mystery when somebody gives up fame and fortune to coach at a local high school?

Not in the case of Steve Cyphers. Cyphers, a former athlete, went on to become a big-​time sportscaster for ESPN. He was popular with the viewers, pulled down a six-​figure salary, reported on a lot of exciting games. Then Cyphers shocked many of his colleagues by throwing in the towel.

He took a 90 percent pay cut and took a job coaching for a school near where he lived. He wants to spend more time with his family, less time on the road. He says he had a great time working for ESPN, but just wants to do something different now. Many at ESPN were shocked, but not those who knew him best.

One colleague, anchor Dan Patrick, didn’t bat an eyelash. “If you told me Steve was going to try to find Sasquatch, or he was going to go meet with the Dalai Lama, or he was going to go run with the bulls in Pamplona, I wouldn’t be surprised by any of that,” says Patrick. “That’s the kind of person he is.”

In other words, Cyphers keeps his eye on the ball. He knows that life is short, and that you have to consider what’s the best use of this brief time. And what it takes to be happy depends on a lot of things. Not just money and fame things nobody knows more about than you.

As Steve Cyphers puts it, “Things work for me if I make everything a game. And right now, my game is on.” Slam-​dunk, Steve.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

The government tells us what to think. About everything from what to eat to whether we should smoke to how we should have sex.

Now they want to tell us what not to think.

Some people believe astronauts never made it to the moon. NASA is worried about this and is spending at least $15,000 of our money to respond. A trivial amount when you consider all the billions the government wastes on this and that. But it’s still ridiculous.

NASA has a good article at their web site refuting common fallacies about the moon walks. And that’s fine. But you don’t have to pay a writer $15,000 to get one good article. Or if you do, I want some of that.

Look, I’ll refute this for free as many others have already. No way NASA could have paid off all the crewmen and media and amateur astronomers and so forth that would have had to participate in a conspiracy this large.

Bottom line: there is plenty of evidence men have landed on the moon, zero evidence of a vast conspiracy enlisting millions of people who later got whacked to cover it up. I’m sure that many of us need instructions and that the people in government have all the answers. But does government really need to spend our money refuting all the strange things that some people believe?

That’s a trillion-​dollar-​a-​year expenditure if it’s a dime. The real problem is that some people are illogical and have a great longing to believe fantastic claims. Can’t cure that with tax dollars.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.